OCR Economics F585 June 2012

Original post by owen1994

My plan is to just clear the book. Once that stage has been complete I will hammer my teachers predicted questions that will come up on the exam. Make sure I know every single evaluation point etc. All definitions off by heart. **** like that. There isn't much pressure on me though because I only need 40% in the Global exam for a grade A overall, and thats what I need for Uni. On the other hand, an A* will be very nice. But my focus has shifted from economics to maths in recent days to focus on the Mechanics exam.

Do you know what you need for an A* at A2? I was under the impression it was 360/400 UMS points but my teacher said you need a minimum of 340/400 (averaging an A at AS Level and an A* at A2) UMS but I don't think that is correct.

I asked my teacher about reading the whole book but he said it was unnecessary - isn't that what your teacher is telling you too?

Reply 42

Original post by TheSelfAcknowleged

I received 100% for the transport paper; I revised by reading through the OCR book and notes made. What are you doing in class at the moment; do you know what areas of the book we're supposed to know for the exam?

the first section defo on moneatry policy

exchange rates
but i dont like this global paper
i find it hard to revise

Reply 43

Original post by kingshan16

Man I am doing this unit, I got a C in transport so I need to retake that aswell as this unit.

How is everyone revising - because I have not even started.

Also I got like 8 exams in June. So kinda feeling screwed.

im using the green textbook

Reply 44

Original post by TheSelfAcknowleged

Do you know what you need for an A* at A2? I was under the impression it was 360/400 UMS points but my teacher said you need a minimum of 340/400 (averaging an A at AS Level and an A* at A2) UMS but I don't think that is correct.

I asked my teacher about reading the whole book but he said it was unnecessary - isn't that what your teacher is telling you too?

I only recently found out the A* rule, its complete bull**** mate honestly.
I also thought that 90% overall would be A* or 360/400, but this is not the case.

To get an A* you need a grade A(80%+) or above at AS level, but you also need 90% or above at A2. It's really stupid.

So basically 80% AS exams + 90%(average, so add exam % and divide by number of exams) A2 exams = A*
100% at AS exams + 90% A2 exams = A*
But. 100% at AS exams + 89% at A2 exams = A

Which in my opinion is ridiculous because your overall average could be above 90% but not get the A* because your A2 exams averaged out to be below 90%.
The worst possible comparison is that someone with the bare minimum A* of 80% at AS and 90% at A2 averages out overall at 85% and gets the A*. But someone with 100% at AS and 89% at A2 averages out overall at about 94.5% but does not receive the A*.

I am in a **** position for business. My AS results were really good, high 90s. And after my unit 3 exam in A2 my current average was 92.5%, but my A2 unit 3 exam waas 87.5%(which is below the 90% A2 barrier), so I need to get 92.5% in the next exam for A* overall to get my A2 at 90% average. So basically the new A* rule is **** because people who do worse overall can get an A* compared to someone who averages out better.

But for my economics I got 100% in unit 3, so only need 80% in F585.

Sorry for long explanation, I hope it helped.

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 45

Original post by owen1994

I only recently found out the A* rule, its complete bull**** mate honestly.
I also thought that 90% overall would be A* or 360/400, but this is not the case.

To get an A* you need a grade A(80%+) or above at AS level, but you also need 90% or above at A2. It's really stupid.

So basically 80% AS exams + 90%(average, so add exam % and divide by number of exams) A2 exams = A*
100% at AS exams + 90% A2 exams = A*
But. 100% at AS exams + 89% at A2 exams = A

Which in my opinion is ridiculous because your overall average could be above 90% but not get the A* because your A2 exams averaged out to be below 90%.
The worst possible comparison is that someone with the bare minimum A* of 80% at AS and 90% at A2 averages out overall at 85% and gets the A*. But someone with 100% at AS and 89% at A2 averages out overall at about 94.5% but does not receive the A*.

I am in a **** position for business. My AS results were really good, high 90s. And after my unit 3 exam in A2 my current average was 92.5%, but my A2 unit 3 exam waas 87.5%(which is below the 90% A2 barrier), so I need to get 92.5% in the next exam for A* overall to get my A2 at 90% average. So basically the new A* rule is **** because people who do worse overall can get an A* compared to someone who averages out better.

But for my economics I got 100% in unit 3, so only need 80% in F585.

Sorry for long explanation, I hope it helped.

Very informative, thank you for your response, and good luck in your future exams; I also achieved 100% in the transport economics exam, and I know how much effort I had put into it - if that's anything to go by, just working hard should give you a good enough chance to get an A* :smile:

I entirely understand what you're saying and it is indeed unfair how the A* rule is working :\

May I ask what you've revised for at the moment, and currently expecting to revise within the next month? Thanks.

Reply 46

Azland

8

Original post by owen1994

I only recently found out the A* rule, its complete bull**** mate honestly.
I also thought that 90% overall would be A* or 360/400, but this is not the case.

To get an A* you need a grade A(80%+) or above at AS level, but you also need 90% or above at A2. It's really stupid.

So basically 80% AS exams + 90%(average, so add exam % and divide by number of exams) A2 exams = A*
100% at AS exams + 90% A2 exams = A*
But. 100% at AS exams + 89% at A2 exams = A

Which in my opinion is ridiculous because your overall average could be above 90% but not get the A* because your A2 exams averaged out to be below 90%.
The worst possible comparison is that someone with the bare minimum A* of 80% at AS and 90% at A2 averages out overall at 85% and gets the A*. But someone with 100% at AS and 89% at A2 averages out overall at about 94.5% but does not receive the A*.

I am in a **** position for business. My AS results were really good, high 90s. And after my unit 3 exam in A2 my current average was 92.5%, but my A2 unit 3 exam waas 87.5%(which is below the 90% A2 barrier), so I need to get 92.5% in the next exam for A* overall to get my A2 at 90% average. So basically the new A* rule is **** because people who do worse overall can get an A* compared to someone who averages out better.

But for my economics I got 100% in unit 3, so only need 80% in F585.

Sorry for long explanation, I hope it helped.

You should be happy with such rules. In CIE even if you get 90% at A2 and 85% at AS you wont get it. You need like a 90% average on both AS and A2 - sometimes more depending on boundaries determined by cambridge. Like for example - Total marks for CIE A Level math is 240 ( including AS and A2 ). If you get below 230/250, no A*.

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 47

Original post by TheSelfAcknowleged

Very informative, thank you for your response, and good luck in your future exams; I also achieved 100% in the transport economics exam, and I know how much effort I had put into it - if that's anything to go by, just working hard should give you a good enough chance to get an A* :smile:

I entirely understand what you're saying and it is indeed unfair how the A* rule is working :\

May I ask what you've revised for at the moment, and currently expecting to revise within the next month? Thanks.

As I have said before, just try and cover everything in the economics book before the exam by re-writing the book. Try get 5 pages done a day or do some whenever I can, (Even though its laborious I still thinks its the easiest part.)
I think it will be easier to revise closer to the exam because I am lazy as **** unless I have a large amount of pressure on my back.

My focus though is Maths because that is the only thing I have to worry about, in terms of getting into my uni. I have a really poor teacher and I have to teach myself the last two exams, which can take a lot of time going through the book.

I'd would like A*A*B but I only need AAB. And for two of the A's I only need U/E in the next exams. But for maths, my current average is only 76% which I believe does not represent my ability or potential in maths due to the numerous amount of **** teachers I have had for maths at my college. Always seem to get stuck with the bad teacher...so not fair.

What are you doing at Uni?

Reply 48

uxa595

21

anyone had any of the toolkits for this yet?

Reply 49

Original post by uxa595

anyone had any of the toolkits for this yet?

nah have u bro ?

Reply 50

Original post by owen1994

As I have said before, just try and cover everything in the economics book before the exam by re-writing the book. Try get 5 pages done a day or do some whenever I can, (Even though its laborious I still thinks its the easiest part.)
I think it will be easier to revise closer to the exam because I am lazy as **** unless I have a large amount of pressure on my back.

My focus though is Maths because that is the only thing I have to worry about, in terms of getting into my uni. I have a really poor teacher and I have to teach myself the last two exams, which can take a lot of time going through the book.

I'd would like A*A*B but I only need AAB. And for two of the A's I only need U/E in the next exams. But for maths, my current average is only 76% which I believe does not represent my ability or potential in maths due to the numerous amount of **** teachers I have had for maths at my college. Always seem to get stuck with the bad teacher...so not fair.

What are you doing at Uni?

Unlucky with the maths; just work hard and I'm sure you can achieve your desired grade. For GCSE I was in set 3 out of 6 - I revised out of class - and I received an A* :smile:

Unfortunately, I didn't focus as much on Maths at AS-level as I was primarily focusing on the social science subjects I was taking, so I ended up getting a C, when I was predicted an A :frown:

I would re-sit, but I didn't want any re-sits on my UCAS form; plus there were other reasons for dropping Maths.

I'm hoping to do Politics at Nottingham or at York (both want AAB). I'm looking to get A*AA, however.

Reply 51

Original post by owen1994

As I have said before, just try and cover everything in the economics book before the exam by re-writing the book. Try get 5 pages done a day or do some whenever I can, (Even though its laborious I still thinks its the easiest part.)
I think it will be easier to revise closer to the exam because I am lazy as **** unless I have a large amount of pressure on my back.

My focus though is Maths because that is the only thing I have to worry about, in terms of getting into my uni. I have a really poor teacher and I have to teach myself the last two exams, which can take a lot of time going through the book.

I'd would like A*A*B but I only need AAB. And for two of the A's I only need U/E in the next exams. But for maths, my current average is only 76% which I believe does not represent my ability or potential in maths due to the numerous amount of **** teachers I have had for maths at my college. Always seem to get stuck with the bad teacher...so not fair.

What are you doing at Uni?

Oh, and my economics teacher told me that reading the whole book seemed a bit unnecesary. I don't want to put words in his mouth (as I can't remember what he said perfectly), but I believe his argument is that if you understand what the extract wants of you, the questions most likely to come up and how to answer them, you'll be in a good position to get a good grade. I don't think he explicitly, or even implicitly said don't read the book - obviously, reading it is better than nothing - but I think what he may have been implying was that you could start to learn irrelevant concepts.
For example, could I ask, what extract refers to concepts like the terms of trade or the Heckscher-Ohlin theory of international trade?

If you ask me, it's good to know what's in the book - but that doesn't mean it will help you in the exam. I conceed I am currently only focusing on Extract 1 and 2, but I hope you get my point.

I'm not sure whether or not to revise exchange rates (p254-264 of the domino OCR economics book); are you revising this (I imagine so), and if so, how could they bring that up in the exam? I imagine they may discuss the merits or drawbacks of China's fixed exchange rate, but I'd imagine that'd be stretching it? To be honest, I'll probably revise it anyway as it's interesting - but I fear it is totally irrelevant to the questions they'll ask. It seems like the book is comprehensive, and not really going to be explicitly refered to in any questions. Do you agree with me? The first section, OK it seems totally relevant, but from what I've seen on relevant topics to extract 2, I don't feel that compelled to learn the exchange rate section if it's not relevant :\

Reply 52

Original post by TheSelfAcknowleged

Oh, and my economics teacher told me that reading the whole book seemed a bit unnecesary. I don't want to put words in his mouth (as I can't remember what he said perfectly), but I believe his argument is that if you understand what the extract wants of you, the questions most likely to come up and how to answer them, you'll be in a good position to get a good grade. I don't think he explicitly, or even implicitly said don't read the book - obviously, reading it is better than nothing - but I think what he may have been implying was that you could start to learn irrelevant concepts.
For example, could I ask, what extract refers to concepts like the terms of trade or the Heckscher-Ohlin theory of international trade?

If you ask me, it's good to know what's in the book - but that doesn't mean it will help you in the exam. I conceed I am currently only focusing on Extract 1 and 2, but I hope you get my point.

I'm not sure whether or not to revise exchange rates (p254-264 of the domino OCR economics book); are you revising this (I imagine so), and if so, how could they bring that up in the exam? I imagine they may discuss the merits or drawbacks of China's fixed exchange rate, but I'd imagine that'd be stretching it? To be honest, I'll probably revise it anyway as it's interesting - but I fear it is totally irrelevant to the questions they'll ask. It seems like the book is comprehensive, and not really going to be explicitly refered to in any questions. Do you agree with me? The first section, OK it seems totally relevant, but from what I've seen on relevant topics to extract 2, I don't feel that compelled to learn the exchange rate section if it's not relevant :\

I do not agree with you. I think it would be fool's decision to only revise stuff that you are hoping to come up in the exam, for example, I thought that in Business a question could not come up in SWOT analysis or extremely unlikely and did not revise it and guess what? Yep it came up. And I think the first section of the book in terms of F585 is the least relevant chapter given that it's basically just a reminder section of what you learnt in F582 with some additional detail.
The second chapter on the other hand is extremely relevant as its about comparative/absolute advantages (China and their abundance or rare earths, labour intensive production, fixed exchange rates, terms of trade (which will improve if the price of their exports rises if they impose export tariffs on them, given the derived demand nature making them price inelastic), which are all linked in with China.
I can't really say anymore because I haven't exactly went through all the extracts yet, or in detail. You also said reading the whole book is unnecessary, well in my opinion it's not if you have a good memory. Reading doesn't take a large amount of time. Due to my very poor memory I have to write stuff down. So I revise economics by re-writing the book, which I think is one of the most effective methods of learning. Either way, my focus is clear book-> clear extracts -> clear definitions -> re-read book/f582 -> practice questions -> redo practice questions -> look at the economics in context in book -> questions in book which usually come up in exam. Obviously I need to step in reality here because I would only do that if I could be bothered to do that.

-> Need to focus on maths is prio for me.
-> Good luck anyway, and if you can, you may as well put the effort in.
-> There is no point in limiting your own potential. If you do what your teacher -> says you are simply taking the easy route up the mountain. (Can't brag about that can you. I got to the peak of mount everrest, but I used a high altitude copter)

Reply 53

Original post by owen1994

I do not agree with you. I think it would be fool's decision to only revise stuff that you are hoping to come up in the exam, for example, I thought that in Business a question could not come up in SWOT analysis or extremely unlikely and did not revise it and guess what? Yep it came up. And I think the first section of the book in terms of F585 is the least relevant chapter given that it's basically just a reminder section of what you learnt in F582 with some additional detail.
The second chapter on the other hand is extremely relevant as its about comparative/absolute advantages (China and their abundance or rare earths, labour intensive production, fixed exchange rates, terms of trade (which will improve if the price of their exports rises if they impose export tariffs on them, given the derived demand nature making them price inelastic), which are all linked in with China.
I can't really say anymore because I haven't exactly went through all the extracts yet, or in detail. You also said reading the whole book is unnecessary, well in my opinion it's not if you have a good memory. Reading doesn't take a large amount of time. Due to my very poor memory I have to write stuff down. So I revise economics by re-writing the book, which I think is one of the most effective methods of learning. Either way, my focus is clear book-> clear extracts -> clear definitions -> re-read book/f582 -> practice questions -> redo practice questions -> look at the economics in context in book -> questions in book which usually come up in exam. Obviously I need to step in reality here because I would only do that if I could be bothered to do that.

-> Need to focus on maths is prio for me.
-> Good luck anyway, and if you can, you may as well put the effort in.
-> There is no point in limiting your own potential. If you do what your teacher -> says you are simply taking the easy route up the mountain. (Can't brag about that can you. I got to the peak of mount everrest, but I used a high altitude copter)

I didn't say it was unnecessary, I was reflecting on what my Economics teacher was implying based on what I remember from what he had said. I do understand what you're saying, and I'll probably end up revising most of the book also (as I've done that for all of my other economics units), but because I too am focusing on another subject; I don't want to spend all my time on Economics revision as I'd need 48% for an A; obviously an 80% for an A* would make me happy - and I'll probably revise to achieve that - but that's why I was implicating reading the whole book to be unnecessary - if we just wanted an A grade, that is. I'm not a risk taker - never have, and hopefully never will be - and I will obviously learn the syllabus, but my teacher is really helpful at deciphering at what extract concepts the exam may gauge your knowledge of, so that's why I was talking about revising only what was relevant and then revising that area incredibly intensely. I believe the essay question is the only extract that is very hard to predict upon, but again, hard work eradicates - as usual - the potentially negative prospects for any student who only revises a limited quantity of material in the hope of success. I guess Economics is one of those subjects where you need comprehensive understanding to achieve, so a full knowledge of the syllabus can only be a good thing :biggrin:

Good luck on your revision, especially for Maths :P as A2 must be quite hard to get to grips with at times

Reply 54

Original post by TheSelfAcknowleged

I didn't say it was unnecessary, I was reflecting on what my Economics teacher was implying based on what I remember from what he had said. I do understand what you're saying, and I'll probably end up revising most of the book also (as I've done that for all of my other economics units), but because I too am focusing on another subject; I don't want to spend all my time on Economics revision as I'd need 48% for an A; obviously an 80% for an A* would make me happy - and I'll probably revise to achieve that - but that's why I was implicating reading the whole book to be unnecessary - if we just wanted an A grade, that is. I'm not a risk taker - never have, and hopefully never will be - and I will obviously learn the syllabus, but my teacher is really helpful at deciphering at what extract concepts the exam may gauge your knowledge of, so that's why I was talking about revising only what was relevant and then revising that area incredibly intensely. I believe the essay question is the only extract that is very hard to predict upon, but again, hard work eradicates - as usual - the potentially negative prospects for any student who only revises a limited quantity of material in the hope of success. I guess Economics is one of those subjects where you need comprehensive understanding to achieve, so a full knowledge of the syllabus can only be a good thing :biggrin:

Good luck on your revision, especially for Maths :P as A2 must be quite hard to get to grips with at times

Yeah I know. You do realise that we have been given stimulus material and not a pre-issued case study? And that stimulus material is completely different to a pre-issued case study? I assume you do haha, anyway, the questions can still be on anything, they are just more specific.

Either way mate, we both know exactly what we need to do to get where we want to be. I have my way, you have yours :biggrin:

. Did you say you wanted to study philosophy at Uni? Why do you want to study that? I still haven't been through the extracts either. Did a question in economics today though and found it alright.

I think it was

"Discuss the arguments in terms of China's restrictions on its exports of rare earths"

I just talked about protectionism. Terms of trade, because the restrictions or quotas will raise the market equilibrium price of the rare earths, this will mean an improvement in the terms of trade, which will mean China will be able to export less to be able to 'pay' for the same amount of imports. How China claims extracting such earths is damaging for the environment through atmospheric pollution and other means. The counter argument of that the USA and Europe use these rare earths for 'Eco-innovation' and in products such as solar panels and electric cars which would offset any pollution caused by extraction, thus China's protectionism could actually be damaging to the environment.

It also goe's against the principle of free trade. China doesn't have a comparative advantage in making products with rare earths as its relative opportunity cost is higher than that of other countries. For this reason, China's quotas will mean an in-efficient use of global resources and because they are limiting their own trading possibility curve. On the other hand the Herscher-Ohlin theory of international trade states that you are supposed to export products that are made with raw materials you have an abundance of (China has 90+% of the worlds rare earths) and import materials that are scarce. If China plan to make these eco-goods or electrical items such as smart phones, then what they are doing shouldn't be a big issue?

Lots of random other points that I just made up, first essay I have done in class for this.

Reply 55